AMD Prepares Phenom II X2 555

[naoan]

Riddle me this. BTW, every component in my system is AMD/certified, if the new i5 750 is only $210 and the 965 is $245, the 750 either ties or beats the 965 at every turn and can be overclocked to 4GHz, what the hell is AMD going to do??!! Flood the market, don't flood the market, who cares. I would not envy the position of saying my company rules the sub $200 market. AMD had better get it together or my Lian Li Spider case ( I said every component) is going to look silly with Intel Inside.

If your upgrading your AMD rig, O.K. for the selection, if your building new, Intel is slapping AMD around.

As one review put it, the new i5 should be called "coffin nailer"

Not everyone buy a $200 cpu... AMD still make sense on sub $200 price point, for now
will be interesting to see when core i3 and cheaper core i5 model is out

 

[eidairaman1]

This stuff here makes me wonder if the Quad Core is even worth a damn for what I intend on building.

Riddle me this. BTW, every component in my system is AMD/certified, if the new i5 750 is only $210 and the 965 is $245, the 750 either ties or beats the 965 at every turn and can be overclocked to 4GHz, what the hell is AMD going to do??!! Flood the market, don't flood the market, who cares. I would not envy the position of saying my company rules the sub $200 market. AMD had better get it together or my Lian Li Spider case ( I said every component) is going to look silly with Intel Inside.

If your upgrading your AMD rig, O.K. for the selection, if your building new, Intel is slapping AMD around.

As one review put it, the new i5 should be called "coffin nailer"

The way you are talking, it sounds like you are really wanting to go with Intel, so I suggest you do so because for 1 you're wasting your breath by your comment above and 2 I'm sure there are people who would put your current hardware to better use than you do.

-end game-

 

[mdm-adph]

This stuff here makes me wonder if the Quad Core is even worth a damn for what I intend on building.

If you're building a gaming PC, then no.

Doesn't really matter, anyway -- if you go AMD, you can always just buy a cheap (but fast) dual core now and just upgrade to the latest quad-core down the road.

 

[LaidLawJones]

The way you are talking, it sounds like you are really wanting to go with Intel, so I suggest you do so because for 1 you're wasting your breath by your comment above and 2 I'm sure there are people who would put your current hardware to better use than you do.

NO There is no one out there who could put my rig to better use as there are very few people out there who would take the time or have the access to equipment that I have to completely mod EVERY PART of the system to make it the current system it is. As an example, I am currently customizing water blocks and hard volt modding for a max performance tri fire 3870 setup.

Yes I am getting a little tired of always looking at second place. I would not even mind a close second. As I have been using AMD for so long I can't even remember when, K6 days, it will take a lot to get me to go Intel. Just as I will not go green team, tried, had very lousy experience with them.

I am frustrated with AMD and the stuff they are releasing. You can't be telling me that Intel has the only people in the entire world who are capable of designing a decent chip. So AMD had better hope I do not take your advice because if a hard core supporter like me decides to go Intel, then there are a lot of people who won't even give AMD a chance.

 

[mdm-adph]

NO There is no one out there who could put my rig to better use as there are very few people out there who would take the time or have the access to equipment that I have to completely mod EVERY PART of the system to make it the current system it is. As an example, I am currently customizing water blocks and hard volt modding for a max performance tri fire 3870 setup.

Yes I am getting a little tired of always looking at second place. I would not even mind a close second. As I have been using AMD for so long I can't even remember when, K6 days, it will take a lot to get me to go Intel. Just as I will not go green team, tried, had very lousy experience with them.

I am frustrated with AMD and the stuff they are releasing. You can't be telling me that Intel has the only people in the entire world who are capable of designing a decent chip. So AMD had better hope I do not take your advice because if a hard core supporter like me decides to go Intel, then there are a lot of people who won't even give AMD a chance.

Dude -- sell your X2 6000+, sell those three silly 3870's, and buy you a Phenom II and a 4870 (or two) and quit yer damn bellyaching. You'll be happy, trust me.

Spending money on designing water blocks for 3870's, at this point, not really worth it.

 

[TheMailMan78]

Dude -- sell your X2 6000+, sell those three silly 3870's, and buy you a Phenom II and a 4870 (or two) and quit yer damn bellyaching. You'll be happy, trust me.

Spending money on designing water blocks for 3870's, at this point, not really worth it.

Its never been worth it. Name a game that stresses a 3870. I say waterblock the whole damn system. Its never really worth it but for fun anyways.

 

[1Kurgan1]

I don't understand how frustrated you can possibly be here. I mean if you had purchased new hardware recently and were not happy with it I could see it. 10 months ago I spent $525 on my videocard alone. Last month I put forward another $500 chunk just on a case, mobo, and WC parts, and a few tools to mod with. Your not really looking at second place, your looking at like 15th.

But beyond talking about your hardware, Red camp is doing the best since the original dual core days. Their Phenom 1's just couldn't keep up with even the oldest Quad (Q6600) and especially not something like a Q9400 or Q9550. But PII's they have done a great job with. The compete very well in gaming, and honestly the i5 isn't a huge deal. It can only run 8x + 8x in CF/SLI the scaling will cripple it in high end gaming. And it has no HT so it won't crush in encoding like the i7's do, so I don't see the massive issue here.

Also the other end of the Red camp (AMD) is and has been turning out amazing products. The nice thing about this is, when one end of this company pulls (already has on both ends) it together it just helps fuel their fire. Tomorrow is the unveiling of DX11 cards that will soon be on the market. I'm not sure what the problem is. Unless you are going out and buying a $1000 processor, then there is no point in taking shots at AMD top processors. And most people aren't, so I don't see why those 1k procs are always the benchmark of performance when no one has them.

 

[mdm-adph]

Its never been worth it. Name a game that stresses a 3870. I say waterblock the whole damn system. Its never really worth it but for fun anyways.

Dude, from what I've heard, even the latest version of WoW will stress a 3870 when played at 1920x1200 (the shadowing engine is especially harsh). I'm sure waterblocking three 3870's would be a nice project, but if the previous poster was whining about speed, then there are certainly directions that would be more worth it.

 

[1Kurgan1]

Dude, from what I've heard, even the latest version of WoW will stress a 3870 when played at 1920x1200 (the shadowing engine is especially harsh). I'm sure waterblocking three 3870's would be a nice project, but if the previous poster was whining about speed, then there are certainly directions that would be more worth it.

Wow is a horribly optimized game. Maxed out at 1680x1050 my 4870x2 chokes on that game, finally got sick of that crap.

Anyways, anything with AA stresses 3870's really well.

 

[TheMailMan78]

Dude, from what I've heard, even the latest version of WoW will stress a 3870 when played at 1920x1200 (the shadowing engine is especially harsh). I'm sure waterblocking three 3870's would be a nice project, but if the previous poster was whining about speed, then there are certainly directions that would be more worth it.

WoW stresses everything. It runs like crap on a 4870x2. Its the game man. Its as optimized as a bicycle without a seat on a dirt road.

 

[mdm-adph]

Wow is a horribly optimized game. Maxed out at 1680x1050 my 4870x2 chokes on that game, finally got sick of that crap.

Anyways, anything with AA stresses 3870's really well.

True -- forgot about the crappy AA with the 3000 series. Aye, WoW's engine was great until they built-in the "shadow" crap a version or so ago. You have to turn it all the way off to get decent framerates at all, on nearly anything.

But, just like Crysis, them's the breaks.

WoW stresses everything. It runs like crap on a 4870x2. Its the game man. Its as optimized as a bicycle without a seat on a dirt road.

Hey, didn't used to be that way -- used to be you could play the thing on a damn GeForce 2 (trust me, I did). Hell, turn down the settings in it today, and it can probably still be done.

 

[TheMailMan78]

Anyways, anything with AA stresses 3870's really well.

Not really man. We are just spoiled with the 4800 series. The 3870 is WAY more powerful than any console and lets face it. We get nothing but ports anyways.

 

[mdm-adph]

Not really man. We are just spoiled with the 4800 series. The 3870 is WAY more powerful than any console and lets face it. We get nothing but ports anyways.

"Powerful" is subjective, sadly enough. The technology is only as good as what's coded for it, and sometimes the level of optimization seen in XBox 360 games makes me jealous (to get those games working on it is amazing, with its, what -- 256mb of RAM?).

 

[1Kurgan1]

Hey, didn't used to be that way -- used to be you could play the thing on a damn GeForce 2 (trust me, I did). Hell, turn down the settings in it today, and it can probably still be done.

You can still play it with a low end system thats why the game is optimized like garbage for high end systems is because they don't care about them. Until a month ago a friend was playing on a AMD 2500+ single core, 512mb ram, and built in video.

Not really man. We are just spoiled with the 4800 series. The 3870 is WAY more powerful than any console and lets face it. We get nothing but ports anyways.

Not spoiled, it was just a leap, just like the performance leap from 7900's to 8800's. Or old school leap from 8500 to 9800's. But the console part is being discussed in another thread, don't see the point in discussing any of that here.

 

[TheMailMan78]

You can still play it with a low end system thats why the game is optimized like garbage for high end systems is because they don't care about them. Until a month ago a friend was playing on a AMD 2500+ single core, 512mb ram, and built in video.



Not spoiled, it was just a leap, just like the performance leap from 7900's to 8800's. Or old school leap from 8500 to 9800's. But the console part is being discussed in another thread, don't see the point in discussing any of that here.

Oh I wasnt going too man. I was just stating my opinion. Don't worry I know where your coming from

 

[LaidLawJones]

I am going to be upgrading the cpu shortly. Just waiting for the AMD line up to finish arriving. The water blocks are EK, paid $25 way back when, 3 3870's heavily modded, had one at 975/1340, will attain 4890 performance. Power consumption does not bother me at all.

I am just having a hard time understanding how AMD could have fallen so far behind. ATI and the other one exchange blows on a continual basis. ATI may not have first spot, but the cards are 90% and their price reflects that.

If the newest lowest Intel beats the best AMD, then that's not competition, that's being allowed to live because the other guy is letting you. If Intel decided to really hurt AMD, then all they would have to do is lower their prices for ~6 months, say $150 for the base i5, and AMD would go away.

Again I ask, how in the hell did it get this way??!! There must be somebody out there with an IQ level that would allow AMD to redesign their chips and compete. I mean really compete. They don't have to be #1 but they have to offer something better then the lowest rung.

I will be building a new rig in the new year, not buying first out of the gate anymore, that's why I have 3 3870's, and AMD will have had to lower their prices on their lineup, unless they have something up their sleeve. I hope AMD is pulling the rope a dope routine.

 

[mdm-adph]

I am going to be upgrading the cpu shortly. Just waiting for the AMD line up to finish arriving. The water blocks are EK, paid $25 way back when, 3 3870's heavily modded, had one at 975/1340, will attain 4890 performance. Power consumption does not bother me at all.

I am just having a hard time understanding how AMD could have fallen so far behind. ATI and the other one exchange blows on a continual basis. ATI may not have first spot, but the cards are 90% and their price reflects that.

If the newest lowest Intel beats the best AMD, then that's not competition, that's being allowed to live because the other guy is letting you. If Intel decided to really hurt AMD, then all they would have to do is lower their prices for ~6 months, say $150 for the base i5, and AMD would go away.

Again I ask, how in the hell did it get this way??!! There must be somebody out there with an IQ level that would allow AMD to redesign their chips and compete. I mean really compete. They don't have to be #1 but they have to offer something better then the lowest rung.

I will be building a new rig in the new year, not buying first out of the gate anymore, that's why I have 3 3870's, and AMD will have had to lower their prices on their lineup, unless they have something up their sleeve. I hope AMD is pulling the rope a dope routine.

I still don't see what you're complaining about. Intel is a step ahead, that's all -- just one step. The Core2 is matched by the PhenomII, and the cheapest Core i5 does NOT always beat the PhenomII (did you see the benchmarks?).

AMDs CPUs are just fine where they're at, and ATI's graphic cards are wonderful right now -- getting an AMD chip is a bargain still, because the appropriate motherboards are a lot cheaper than the ones necessary for an i7 or i5.

You're really complaining about nothing, when you break it down.

 

[Kitkat]

WoW stresses everything. It runs like crap on a 4870x2. Its the game man. Its as optimized as a bicycle without a seat on a dirt road.

MMOs are more cpu power + 3870 was always an aquard card.

 

[Zubasa]

Wow is a horribly optimized game. Maxed out at 1680x1050 my 4870x2 chokes on that game, finally got sick of that crap.

Anyways, anything with AA stresses 3870's really well.

How does it chokes a 4870X2?
My friend running WoW on a 4870X2 finds out that he is running half a card.

The shadow engine in WoW is not poorly optimized, it is down right buggy on ATi cards.

 

[1Kurgan1]

I am going to be upgrading the cpu shortly. Just waiting for the AMD line up to finish arriving. The water blocks are EK, paid $25 way back when, 3 3870's heavily modded, had one at 975/1340, will attain 4890 performance. Power consumption does not bother me at all.

You would need to clock those quiet a bit higher to get 4890 performance as those come out of the box with 850mhz on the GPU, and their clock for clock performance is far better. I'm sure those 3870's are screaming fast at that speed, but just can't see 4890 fast.

How does it chokes a 4870X2?
My friend running WoW on a 4870X2 finds out that he is running half a card.

The shadow engine in WoW is not poorly optimized, it is down right buggy on ATi cards.

True WoW doesn't run CF or SLI, well it does, but usage on 2nd GPU doesn't break 20 - 25%. I'm not saying the shadow engine in WoW is poorly optimized, I'm saying it's the whole game. Check their forums, almost no one can get playable settings in dalaran. My friends running a GTX280 and he has the same issue, and thats not a multi GPU card. That game is made for people running crap videocards, they have some higher options, but how they are utilized is just bad.

Like I said (not sure if it was in this thread), it's sad when I can't play WoW maxed out on DX9, then I can head over play some AoC on DX10 maxed out.

 

[pantherx12]

I am going to be upgrading the cpu shortly. Just waiting for the AMD line up to finish arriving. The water blocks are EK, paid $25 way back when, 3 3870's heavily modded, had one at 975/1340, will attain 4890 performance. Power consumption does not bother me at all.

I am just having a hard time understanding how AMD could have fallen so far behind. ATI and the other one exchange blows on a continual basis. ATI may not have first spot, but the cards are 90% and their price reflects that.

If the newest lowest Intel beats the best AMD, then that's not competition, that's being allowed to live because the other guy is letting you. If Intel decided to really hurt AMD, then all they would have to do is lower their prices for ~6 months, say $150 for the base i5, and AMD would go away.

Again I ask, how in the hell did it get this way??!! There must be somebody out there with an IQ level that would allow AMD to redesign their chips and compete. I mean really compete. They don't have to be #1 but they have to offer something better then the lowest rung.

I will be building a new rig in the new year, not buying first out of the gate anymore, that's why I have 3 3870's, and AMD will have had to lower their prices on their lineup, unless they have something up their sleeve. I hope AMD is pulling the rope a dope routine.

The mother boards for i5 etc have shit PCI-e slots, quad sli and crossfire would be a waste, tri fire/sli a waste, even just 2 cards with next gen graphics will still choke the PCI-e slots.

 

[LaidLawJones]

Well this is getting out of hand so briefly. If you think AMD is fine where it is and doesn't always loose, no argument. I never said I did not like ATI I said

ATI may not have first spot, but the cards are 90% and their price reflects that.

ATI and the other one exchange blows on a continual basis.

I have used and will continue to ATI. Green may offer more fps but I have never had a problem with any ATI card either in physically failing or problems hooking them up to external sources. I can not say the same for the green side. However,please not the qualifier in this statement, this is just my personal experience. I am sure that there are people out there who had problems with ATI and will never use them again.

If the i5 is a good chip but lacks MB support, then Intel is shooting themselves in the foot. Thanx to pantherx12 for the info.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2009/09/07/intel_lynnfield_core_i5_i7_processors/1

As for reviews, read the above.

 

[pantherx12]

No problem! its why I'm not getting I5 like I thought I was.

It has the PCI-e controller on board so iits quite limited, x16 for the entire lot other then one slot can run @ x4 regardless due to mobo PCI-E controller.

I don't think its a gamers chip is all : ]

Perfect for editing movies how ever

 

[LaidLawJones]

Totally off topic, but, I scored 8769 furmark with tri fire at stock using a 6000@3.2 and the closest I could find of a 4890 using the equivalent chip, I think, was a fur mark of 9175 using an E8500@3.1.

So if the chips are close, then I think I stand a good chance. I am not sure what the equivalent Intel chip would be.

 

[1Kurgan1]

Totally off topic, but, I scored 8769 furmark with tri fire at stock using a 6000@3.2 and the closest I could find of a 4890 using the equivalent chip, I think, was a fur mark of 9175 using an E8500@3.1.

So if the chips are close, then I think I stand a good chance. I am not sure what the equivalent Intel chip would be.

Furmark doesn't count CPU at all, thats why it's a great test. I though previously you has meant your 3870's were on par 1v1 with a 4890. Didn't know you meant all 3, I would say for sure on that. Thats a pretty nice furmark score for them though considering how big of a leap it was to the 4800 series and you scoring that high. I pulled a 10800 something with my 4870x2.

Also I had mentioned the PCI-E bottleneck previously. When in CF/SLI they only run 8x/8x/4x, the difference between the new 870 and the old 975 was pretty decent when using CF/SLI, but single card difference wasn't much.